The 2012 Vice President Debate last night in Danville, Kentucky was a draw. Democrat Vice President Biden executed a strategy of throwing GOP nominee Congressman Paul Ryan with distractions and interruptions. Ryan did not seem intimidated and remained calm and confident. He was respectful of the elder politician, even while being interrupted 82 times in 90 minutes.

As any parent can tell you, when children are not being truthful or trying desperately to be believed, they often talk fast, interrupt the other person giving facts, make faces, laugh nervously, and mouth the other person is lying, and generally mug out of false frustration.

These antics leave one knowing they are only trying to control the situation. This is not behavior reflecting strength and confidence. The constant Biden interruptions were by design to prevent Ryan from detailing the failed Obama record and presenting details of the Romney plan.

This allows the Democrats to continue the assertion Romney and Ryan are not giving any specifics. Funny thing is, where is any real plan other than to "raise taxes on the rich" and redistribute to "level the playing field" coming out of the Obama and Biden campaign with specifics or not? For example, what does "level the playing field" mean exactly in policies?

A CNN post debate poll results asking "Who won?"gave Ryan a slight edge at 48% versus 44% for Biden. The same CNN poll rewarded Ryan as being the more likeable of the two by 10 points. Other media polls reflected Biden as the winner by a wider margin.

Both candidates fired up their base, but more than likely neither did little to move the needle significantly with the 6-10% of undecided voters. Biden's antics may have played well with the left, but it was a losing strategy and not effective with the middle.

It was disturbing the fiscal cliff looming and America's overall energy policy was not front and center in the debate. Will they be in the remaining presidential debates? What we know should be, and will be, is the Libya investigation.

Debate moderator Martha Raddatz raised the pertinent question right out of the gate. Biden's response was a test drive of excuses to gage acceptability for Obama and the upcoming presidential debates, especially the last debate designated as a foreign policy debate. The transcript excerpts from The Washington Post.

"I would like to begin with Libya. On a rather somber note, one month ago tonight, on the anniversary of 9/11, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other brave Americans were killed in a terrorist attack in Benghazi. The State Department has now made clear, there were no protesters there.

RADDATZ: it was a pre-planned assault by heavily armed men. Wasn't this a massive intelligence failure, Vice President Biden?

BIDEN: What is was, it was a tragedy, Martha. It — Chris Stevens was one of our best. We lost three other brave Americans.

I can make absolutely two commitments to you and all the American people tonight. One, we will find and bring to justice the men who did this. And secondly, we will get to the bottom of it, and whatever — wherever the facts lead us, wherever they lead us, we will make clear to the American public, because whatever mistakes were made will not be made again.

When you're looking at a president, Martha, it seems to me that you should take a look at his most important responsibility. That's caring for the national security of the country. And the best way to do that is take a look at how he's handled the issues of the day."

Biden essentially floated blaming the entire intelligence community for President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton for not knowing this was a terrorist attack.

This contradicts what is currently known in investigations already being conducted by Congress this week in Washington. Intelligence confirmed it was a terrorist attack within 24 hours.

Is it plausible this information was not given to the White House by Intelligence? Is it believable President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and United Nations Ambassador Rice did not know?

Did they in fact know Libya was a terrorist attack reality for two weeks as they continued to recite an orchestrated spontaneous protest based on a movie trailer video for two weeks in a government produced apology video, on political talk shows, in a United Nations speech, and press briefings?

"RADDATZ: Congressman Ryan?

RYAN: We mourn the loss of these four Americans who were murdered.

RYAN: When you take a look at what has happened just in the last few weeks, they sent the U.N. ambassador out to say that this was because of a protest and a YouTube video. It took the president two weeks to acknowledge that this was a terrorist attack.

He went to the U.N. and in his speech at the U.N. he said six times — he talked about the YouTube video.

Look, if we're hit by terrorists we're going to call it for what it is, a terrorist attack. Our ambassador in Paris has a Marine detachment guarding him. Shouldn't we have a Marine detachment guarding our ambassador in Benghazi, a place where we knew that there was an Al Qaida cell with arms?

This is becoming more troubling by the day. They first blamed the YouTube video. Now they're trying to blame the Romney-Ryan ticket for making this an issue.

With respect to Iraq, we had the same position before the withdrawal, which was we agreed with the Obama administration. Let's have a status of forces agreement to make sure that we secure our gains. The vice president was put in charge of those negotiations by President Obama and they failed to get the agreement. We don't have a status of forces agreement because they failed to get one. That's what we are talking about.

Now, when it comes to our veterans, we owe them a great debt of gratitude for what they've done for us, including your son Beau. But we also want to make sure that we don't lose the things we fought so hard to get.

Now, with respect to Afghanistan, the 2014 deadline, we agree with a 2014 transition. But what we also want it do is make sure that we're not projecting weakness abroad, and that's what's happening here.

RYAN: This Benghazi issue would be a tragedy in and of itself, but unfortunately it's indicative of a broader problem. And that is what we are watching on our TV screens is the unraveling of the Obama foreign policy, which is making the (inaudible) more chaotic us less safe.

BIDEN: With all due respect, that's a bunch of malarkey.

RADDATZ: And why is that so?

BIDEN: Because not a single thing he said is accurate. First of all…

RADDATZ: Be specific.

BIDEN: I will be very specific. Number one, the — this lecture on embassy security — the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, number one. So much for the embassy security piece.

Number two, Governor Romney, before he knew the facts, before he even knew that our ambassador was killed, he was out making a political statement which was panned by the media around the world. And this talk about this — this weakness. I — I don't understand what my friend's talking about here.

We — this is a president who's gone out and done everything he has said he was going to do. This is a guy who's repaired our alliances so the rest of the world follows us again. This is the guy who brought the entire world, including Russia and China, to bring about the most devastating — most devastating — the most devastating efforts on Iran to make sure that they in fact stop (inaudible).

Look, I — I just — I mean, these guys bet against America all the time."

Is Biden in reality when he portrays Obama as a strong foreign policy U.S. president the world follows? How influential has the U.S. been in the United Nations or in the world during the Obama presidency?

"RADDATZ: Can we talk — let me go back to Libya.

BIDEN: Yeah, sure.

RADDATZ: What were you first told about the attack? Why — why were people talking about protests? When people in the consulate first saw armed men attacking with guns, there were no protesters. Why did that go on (inaudible)?

BIDEN: Because that was exactly what we were told by the intelligence community. The intelligence community told us that. As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment. That's why there's also an investigation headed by Tom Pickering, a leading diplomat from the Reagan years, who is doing an investigation as to whether or not there are any lapses, what the lapses were, so that they will never happen again.

RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there.

BIDEN: Well, we weren't told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security again. And by the way, at the time we were told exactly — we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view."

This week's Congressional hearings reflect the polar opposite of what Biden is saying. Letters asking for more security are in evidence. Biden's excuses seem to only confirm the government is not giving Americans the full information it could, or there was complete incompetence in the understanding and handling of Libya security needs.

This is an administration used to getting away with blaming others, minimizing the importance of situations, giving obviously ridiculous explanations to the main stream media without being challenged, and believing the American people will buy stone-walling on the truth.

The Obama/Biden administration is forgetting Libya was in fact a life and death situation. Biden got his facts completely wrong in his answers to the valid questions.

Biden test drove Libya excuses for Obama in this VP debate to gage if Americans will buy implausible explanations at best or arrogant, hyper-politicization leading to incompetency at worst.